3) on the highway you may see a vehicle swerve, but did you actually see a phone being used?

4) see a cop.....drop the phone and scratch your ear.

Cell phone use on the road is a problem, but I feel for cops trying to police it........next to impossible to catch the stealthy ones ...........they only can get the real dumb ones.

I completely support the "idea", but ultimately I think the only solution will be a technological one .......one where the car-tech will only allow a hands-free device to be used while at car is in motion.

People are addicted to cell phones and are not about self regulate. If we can mandate seat belt in cars for safety, surely we can mandate some type of cell phone blocker?

YES I agree ......but here are a few observations about how difficult this law is to police:

1) outside of stop signs/signals and very slow driving areas, it is very difficult to actual see a cell phone in use.

In this area the cops will set up what looks like a speed trap, only it is actually a cop with a telescope watching you while you drive towards him/her. Officer sees you on the phone, sends his buddy in the waiting cruiser off to chase you down and give you your prize.

And I say bring it on, too. Around here we could have ten times as many cops on the highways and they would all pay for themselves many times over.

In this area the cops will set up what looks like a speed trap, only it is actually a cop with a telescope watching you while you drive towards him/her. Officer sees you on the phone, sends his buddy in the waiting cruiser off to chase you down and give you your prize.

And I say bring it on, too. Around here we could have ten times as many cops on the highways and they would all pay for themselves many times over.

If the government, through their traffic revenue collector division [the police] really want to increase revenue [Oh yes they do!!!!] and, increase safety, this seems like a no brainer. The level of close calls while driving my pu, and riding my bikes over the last 5 yrs, witnessing of errant car drivers veering all over the place, red light running, green light non-movement, slowing down for no apparent reason,,,,ALL easily observed text related divertions from driving by other drivers,,,,, I simply cannot see why traffic police cannot make this a financial windfall with minimal effort.

For some reason police and other emergency workers were exempted from BC's "no cell use while driving" law.

The two-way radios they already have are much simpler to operate aren't they?

Its the same in Ontario,

It pisses me off too. I'm presuming its supposed to be for emergency's. But one day I was filling up with gas, when i watched a cop pull in beside me to get gas, He was talking on the cell when he pulled in and i could hear him when he got out of the car. He was discussing with his wife what to pick up for groceries on the way home.

If the government, through their traffic revenue collector division [the police] really want to increase revenue [Oh yes they do!!!!] and, increase safety, this seems like a no brainer. The level of close calls while driving my pu, and riding my bikes over the last 5 yrs, witnessing of errant car drivers veering all over the place, red light running, green light non-movement, slowing down for no apparent reason,,,,ALL easily observed text related divertions from driving by other drivers,,,,, I simply cannot see why traffic police cannot make this a financial windfall with minimal effort.

I believe this isn't the first post where you equated in one form or another that the police are "Revenue Collectors". I would like to present a retort to why this is not actually the case.

Take for example the minor penalty awarded to you for your indiscretion. From the onset of that officers shift to the time of your REWARD, there are his/her wages, vehicle costs, data entry clerks, and the list goes on. The costs associated for writing that one minor ticket far exceeds the amount of your penalty. Therefore rather than revenue collection is has to be deemed as a deficit and the only way a windfall can be obtained is to raise the ticket premium to cover all costs. I would probably have to give up riding/driving altogether to avoid the risk if I had to foot the bill on the ACTUAL cost.

So can you imagine what the actual cost is when some pissant fights a ticket in the hopes of having it dimished on a technicality. I have paid my fines and points, I considered them as as track days back then as in BC there is no real track since Westwood gave way to realtors.

From a logical and fiscal standpoint, issuing tickets serves no purpose other than penalizing the financially troubled. Those that can afford tickets continue to drive/ride in the same manner. At the end of the day the taxpayer/insuree pays a percentage of everyone elses indiscretions. The alternative would be to up the ante, again not feasible or logical. Keeping in mind the deficit costs of the many recent high profile deficit sentences awarded to drunk drivers in this province. I can only imagine the frustration that the families and relatives of the many victims have to endure as a result of lenient sentencing.

Lastly, for those out or province posters/riders that are dissuaded to travel to BC, I hope that you will reconsider. It's Beautiful BC as the plates state, great riding and can easily be enjoyed by adjusting the air/fuel ratio rotator and enjoying the scenery. Remember that you have already commited to a high risk lifestyle for just being a motorcyclist, the same associated risks and costs are prevalent wherever you choose to travel. Paying a penalty surely is far better than the less desirable outcome.

I believe this isn't the first post where you equated in one form or another that the police are "Revenue Collectors". I would like to present a retort to why this is not actually the case.

Take for example the minor penalty awarded to you for your indiscretion. From the onset of that officers shift to the time of your REWARD, there are his/her wages, vehicle costs, data entry clerks, and the list goes on. The costs associated for writing that one minor ticket far exceeds the amount of your penalty. Therefore rather than revenue collection is has to be deemed as a deficit and the only way a windfall can be obtained is to raise the ticket premium to cover all costs. I would probably have to give up riding/driving altogether to avoid the risk if I had to foot the bill on the ACTUAL cost.

So can you imagine what the actual cost is when some pissant fights a ticket in the hopes of having it dimished on a technicality. I have paid my fines and points, I considered them as as track days back then as in BC there is no real track since Westwood gave way to realtors.

From a logical and fiscal standpoint, issuing tickets serves no purpose other than penalizing the financially troubled. Those that can afford tickets continue to drive/ride in the same manner. At the end of the day the taxpayer/insuree pays a percentage of everyone elses indiscretions. The alternative would be to up the ante, again not feasible or logical. Keeping in mind the deficit costs of the many recent high profile deficit sentences awarded to drunk drivers in this province. I can only imagine the frustration that the families and relatives of the many victims have to endure as a result of lenient sentencing.

Lastly, for those out or province posters/riders that are dissuaded to travel to BC, I hope that you will reconsider. It's Beautiful BC as the plates state, great riding and can easily be enjoyed by adjusting the air/fuel ratio rotator and enjoying the scenery. Remember that you have already commited to a high risk lifestyle for just being a motorcyclist, the same associated risks and costs are prevalent wherever you choose to travel. Paying a penalty surely is far better than the less desirable outcome.

I appreciate your opinion. Unfortunately, you have not succeeded in changing my mind. The way you word it, you make it sound like the revenue collector,,,,,,sorry, traffic police officer, goes out and gets one ticket dispersal per shift. I'm not sure that's the case. No, they usually always set up shop by hiding at the bottom of a hill, in an area quite notable and widely recognized as being speed posted inacurately slower that it would be anywhere else in the world. Safety is not enhanced in these classic cases, it's all about the money. And there they sit and line them up. And don't get me started about the 40km/hr instant impound roadside judgement in BC, based on police officer visual judgement alone without speed detection device confirmation!!! WTF?
You're point about the rich continuing to be able to drive is also inacurate. Even rich people who easily can pay off huge fines, still have their license taken away if they are unable to understand the characteristically conservative speed postings in this province.
I, and most all of my riding friends have chosen over the last few years to do most of their extended riding holidays in the western United States. Not just the silly speed postings within BC, but the main reason is the vastly more entertaining roads found south of the '49th', and the sheer number of them, and the relative thin use of other traffic compared to the minimal, and clogged roads here. And of course, the better weather. And the cheaper fuel, and hotels,,,,food. Rant over.

On the other hand, drivers who text offer a clear danger to me as a motorcyclist, as well as a car driver, so I give full support to the traffic patrol in this regard pressing down on this habit [addiction] among the car driving crowd.